

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

David Vance, Common Cause, (202) 736-5712 or dvance@commoncause.org
Today, the President is expected to sign an Executive Order (EO) that attempts to police speech on social media platforms. The draft Executive Order comes after Twitter fact-checked inaccurate tweets from the President regarding processes for mail-in voting, despite the fact that Twitter enforced its policy to add warning labels to misleading tweets in violation of the platform's community standards.
Today, the President is expected to sign an Executive Order (EO) that attempts to police speech on social media platforms. The draft Executive Order comes after Twitter fact-checked inaccurate tweets from the President regarding processes for mail-in voting, despite the fact that Twitter enforced its policy to add warning labels to misleading tweets in violation of the platform's community standards.
According to a draft, the Executive Order would require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to police speech on social media platforms. The EO specifically calls on the FCC to adopt rules that sets conditions on when Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act grants social media platforms a shield from liability when they decide to suppress or remove content from their sites. The EO would also place restrictions on federal agencies from advertising on social media platforms. Finally, the EO directs the Attorney General to create a working group in collaboration with state attorneys general that would examine the enforcement of state statutes and create watch lists of users based on their interactions with social media content.
Statement of Michael Copps, Common Cause Special Adviser and Former FCC Commissioner:
"This draft Executive Order is a blatant and illegal power grab by the President in his attempt to eliminate any oversight of his spread of misinformation on social media and censor dissenting voices. The President's intentions with this draft Executive Order are clear - to put political pressure on social media companies to keep them from taking any action that would correct blatant disinformation he spreads online, particularly content that would suppress the votes of American citizens. With this draft EO, the President is attempting to shift the conversation away from the RNC's efforts to rig the rules against voters and confuse people about their right to vote.
"The consequences of this draft Executive Order also have dangerous legal and policy implications for the role of our government and our ability to communicate online. In addition to the potential First Amendment violations, the draft Executive Order threatens the independence of the FCC and FTC, which do not take direction from the President. The FCC also has no jurisdiction over websites and social media platforms. More importantly, the FCC is not the speech police of the President and should not be able to decide when social media platforms are shielded from liability immunity when moderating content and when they are not.
"The draft Executive Order could also cripple the ability of federal agencies to advertise on social media at a time when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is providing critical information regarding the ongoing COVID-19 public health crisis. The Census Bureau is also advertising on social media to spread the word about the 2020 Census, a vital component of democracy that ensures our government bases policy decisions on facts and accurate data. Placing restrictions on federal agency advertising, particularly during a public health crisis, has the potential to endanger lives.
"As social media platforms have grown in size, they have become a pathway for bad actors to spread disinformation, spread content designed to interfere with our elections, harass marginalized groups or otherwise disrupt our democracy. But this is not a problem that can be fixed by an Executive Order, especially one from a President with an axe to grind who wants to hand-pick speech he does or does not like."
To view this release online, click here.
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200"The trade powers Trump is illegally usurping are expressly granted to Congress under the Constitution," said Rep. Don Beyer.
Republicans in the US House on Tuesday tried—and narrowly failed—to advance a measure containing language that would have temporarily blocked votes on resolutions disapproving of President Donald Trump’s tariffs.
Democrats voted unanimously to defeat the measure, and were joined by just three House Republicans—Don Bacon of Nebraska, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and Kevin Kiley of California—in a final vote of 214 in favor to 217 opposed.
As reported by MS NOW, House Republicans tucked language preventing challenges to Trump's tariff policies into a rule setting up floor consideration for legislation related to US energy security.
While a similar provision was passed in the House in September before expiring at the end of January, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) was unable to cobble together votes to get it passed this time.
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) celebrated what he described as a "heartening" victory, while expressing concern that the vast majority of Republicans were comfortable letting the president take their constitutionally mandated power over taxation.
"Most Republicans again tried to surrender Congress’ power as a coequal branch of government to check a president who is behaving like a mad king," Beyer wrote in a social media post. "The trade powers Trump is illegally usurping are expressly granted to Congress under the Constitution."
Matt Fuller, director of congressional reporting at MS NOW, similarly argued that "it's a lot more notable to me that 214 House Republicans voted to hand Donald Trump unchecked authority to levy tariffs until August than it is that three House Republicans said 'no.'"
While Tuesday's vote suggests a narrowly divided House, Punchbowl News co-founder Jake Sherman argued that it actually represented a "watershed moment" that could open the door to several defeats for the Trump administration on the House floor in the coming days, as Democrats prepare to hammer the GOP with tariff disapproval resolutions.
"Now Democrats have the opportunity to force unlimited votes on the president's global tariffs, putting Republicans on the spot all the time," Sherman explained in a Wednesday social media post. "If Dems handle this well, this is going to get bad for rank and file House Republicans. And it will piss off Trump."
Sherman's assessment of the situation was echoed by the Wednesday edition of Politico Playbook, which noted that Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) is already teeing up a resolution to overturn Trump's tariffs against Canada that is set for a vote on Wednesday afternoon.
"Given the current mood in the House—every single Dem showed up to vote last night, while plenty of Republicans are uncomfortable with tariffs—Johnson looks all but certain to lose," Politico declared.
Matt Maasdam, a Democratic US House candidate running in Michigan's 7th Congressional District, started putting pressure on incumbent Rep. Tom Barrett (R-Mich.) the morning after the Michigan Republican voted to protect Trump from tariff resolutions.
"Tom Barrett has voted over and over to protect the Trump tariffs that make costs go up," wrote Maasdam on social media. "The tariffs on Canada hit Michigan hard. Auto parts for a car made here cross the border multiple times—in a trade war, it’s our workers and businesses who get hurt."
"It is Trump’s power grab in legislative garb," said one expert.
Congressional Republicans on Tuesday held hearings on a pair of bills that watchdogs, election experts, and Democratic lawmakers characterized as brazen and dangerous efforts to suppress voter turnout in service of President Donald Trump's broader assault on democracy—which has included a call for the GOP to "nationalize the voting."
Tuesday's hearings, held by the House Committees on Rules and Administration, featured a revived version of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE) Act and Rep. Bryan Steil's (R-Wis.) newly introduced Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act, which one analyst described as possibly the "most dangerous attack on voting rights ever" unveiled in the US Congress.
During his opening remarks at the House Administration Committee hearing on the MEGA Act, the panel's ranking member, Rep. Joe Morelle (D-NY), said that "this scheme is not just how Republicans plan to take over our elections, it's how they plan to take over our country."
"Republicans know that they have one hope at winning the next election: change the rules of the game, destroy the rule of law, and desert any last remaining shred of allegiance to the United States Constitution," Morelle added.
@RepJoeMorelle on the anti-voting MEGA Act:
“This scheme is not just how Republicans plan to take over our elections, it’s how they plan to take over our country.”
👇Learn more:https://t.co/kkm6ISuedX pic.twitter.com/g2kRbLIxGX
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) February 10, 2026
Both the SAVE Act—which is expected to get a House vote this week—and the MEGA Act would impose severe restrictions on voting access by effectively eliminating voter registration by mail, implementing nationwide photo ID requirements, banning universal mail-in ballots for federal elections, allowing massive voter roll purges, and threatening nonpartisan election officials with imprisonment if they fail to uphold the bills' strict voter documentation requirements.
If passed, the SAVE Act would require anyone registering to vote in federal elections to furnish documentary proof of US citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate, in person. The Brennan Center for Justice has estimated that 21 million people in the US "lack ready access to these documents," noting that "half of all Americans don’t have a passport, for example, and millions of married women who have changed their names might need to jump through extra hoops to vote."
"Make no mistake: The SAVE Act would stop millions of American citizens from voting," the Brennan Center wrote in an analysis of the legislation on Tuesday. "It would be the most restrictive voting bill ever passed by Congress. It is Trump’s power grab in legislative garb."
The co-chairs of the Not Above the Law Coalition placed the voter suppression bills in the context of Trump's "yearslong campaign of election lies and conspiracy to overturn the 2020 results" as well as "his recent attempts to nationalize election administration, and weaponization of the Department of Justice to intimidate voters and officials."
"Republicans are falling in line by attempting to silence American voters under the guise of 'election integrity,'" the coalition said. "House Republicans are doing Trump's bidding instead of holding him accountable. The real threats to election integrity sit in the White House and among those enabling his authoritarian agenda. Our democracy depends on rejecting this charade and confronting Trump's documented attacks on free and fair elections."
The Trump White House has publicly endorsed the SAVE Act amid mounting fears that the president—animated by false claims of large-scale voter fraud—is moving to undermine the midterm elections later this year.
"It will be up to Democrats to hold their ground and ensure the SAVE Act’s ultimate defeat. It will be up to all of us to not be fooled by the myths and the lies—and protect our elections so they remain free and fair," wrote Brennan Center president Michael Waldman. "And we should stand with election officials who now face threats of groundless criminal prosecution for doing their jobs."
"For voters, who must have the most powerful voice in our democracy," Waldman added, "the stakes are high, and getting higher."
"The billionaires who sat behind Trump at his inauguration: Yeah, the economy is the best ever for them," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "But for the average working person, not quite the case."
US Sen. Bernie Sanders responded incredulously on Tuesday to President Donald Trump's claim that the nation's economy under his stewardship is "the greatest... actually ever in history," despite surging personal and business bankruptcies, plunging consumer sentiment, rising costs, and anemic job and wage growth.
In an appearance on MS NOW, Sanders (I-Vt.) said that "you wonder whether Trump is completely crazy and delusional or just a pathological liar, but the idea that anybody would believe that this is a great economy when 60% of our people are living paycheck to paycheck, when the cost of healthcare is going up, people can't afford housing, people can't afford their basic groceries, the childcare system is dysfunctional, people can't afford to go to college."
"If this is the greatest economy in the history of the world," the senator added, "God help us."
Watch:
Sanders' remarks came in response to Trump's interview Tuesday with Fox Business host Larry Kudlow, during which the president falsely claimed he has ushered in "the greatest period of anything that we've ever seen," including "the greatest economy actually ever in history."
While Trump and members of his class have seen their wealth surge to record levels during his second White House term, working-class Americans are struggling to make ends meet as the president's tariffs and assault on the social safety net drive up costs. One recent analysis estimated that the average US family paid $1,625 in higher costs last year as prices for groceries, housing, and other necessities continued to rise.
Trump's claim of an economic "golden age" in the US was also undermined by a new House Budget Committee report report showing that personal bankruptcy filings increased 11% last year, reaching levels not seen since 2019—during the president's first term in the White House. Those figures came on top of earlier data showing that business bankruptcies are at a 15-year high.
“Donald Trump’s reckless tariff taxes are driving up prices, hurting the economy, and leaving families to pay the price," Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said in a statement. "The only people benefiting in Donald Trump’s economy are his billionaire donors—everyone else is falling further behind.”
Sanders echoed that message during his MS NOW appearance late Tuesday, saying, "The billionaires who sat behind Trump at his inauguration: Yeah, the economy is the best ever for them."
"But for the average working person," Sanders said, "not quite the case."